July 1, 2016

"We have to have access to 100% of America's population. Although relatively few in number, we're talking about talented and trained Americans who are serving their country with honor and distinction. We want to take the opportunity to retain people whose talent we've invested in and who've proven themselves."

Yeah, in the middle of a war, let us expend resources on social engineering instead of winning the war. Typical Obama, a commander in chief who never served a day in the military and who uses the military as a play thing.

It depends on what the "mission" is these days. If it's social engineering and climate change fealty, then a very different sort of enlisted and commissioned personnel are required. I can't wait for the first Medal of Honor to be awarded for climate change heroics or civil rights sacrifice.

I've never liked the word 'openly' in this context. "Serve openly" "Openly gay"

There's a whiff of in-your-face-edness to it.

I think a better way to announce this is would be to say that the Government wants you to do a good, nay, great job, and things going on in your life that are unrelated to how you get your work done are not important, or not the Government's (or your co-workers') business.

Generations of my family have served in the military, including my father, my brother, myself, and both of my sons. Bullshit like this is why I'll actively discourage any of my grandchildren from joining. When politically correct nonsense takes priority over combat effectiveness, the primary result will be a lot of unnecessary deaths. Let the liberals send their kids to the military for a change. My family has done enough.

Why have any standards? Surely the mentally ill and the mentally challenged can serve. Why not paraplegics? Many jobs just require sitting at a chair looking at a tube and pushing buttons. They can be missile silo officers.

Though the distraction of this latest SJ engineering effort is relatively minimal, it does attack the morale of the force.

Carter said.."We don't want barriers unrelated to a person's qualification to serve preventing us from recruiting or retaining the soldier, sailor, airman or marine who can best accomplish the mission. We have to have access to 100% of America's population," he added

Just like my arguments about infantrywomen, "Civil Rights versus Force Effectiveness" does anybody think that allowing the tiny fraction of 1% of the population into the military pool increases our effectiveness, or distracts from the warfighting mission?

PS: Next Step in SJ Engineering? Read Carter's statement again. He telegraphed it. Illegal immigrants in uniform. And NO, they aren't allowed today, though a few sneak in by lying on their oaths, and stealing SSNs. Legal immigrants are encouraged however.

Bob Ellison said...What matters more, the ability to heft an 180-pound load on your shoulders, or the thoughts in your head?

It's mostly f'ing SJ distraction from the mission of killing and breaking things, but it does demonstrate again that this administrations mission is not to improve the effectiveness of the force.

Clearly the load more than the mental status of the soldier, but think about that for a second. The TH community has a very high suicide rate. There is an argument that TG is more mental illness than mental attitude.

Do you think that the morale and effectiveness of a parachute infantry company led by a person with 180 pounds on zir back, wearing a skirt is going to be as high as that of the next company?

What is worse than this story is another today that the Secretary of the Navy is using adherence to climate change doctrine (a forbidden religious test) as a factor in promoting senior Navy Officers.

I've seen a variety of presentations on this topic at Meteorological Meetings -- and the Navy's Mission includes -- I'm paraphrasing badly -- patrolling the Oceans, so if there is a chance that the Arctic will open, they have to be alert to that possibility and anticipate and plan for its occurrence.

That might look like adherence to climate change doctrine, but I think it's also bureaucrats being bureaucrats and planning for possibilities. Let's have a Telecon!!

MadisonMan said...and the Navy's Mission includes -- I'm paraphrasing badly -- patrolling the Oceans, so if there is a chance that the Arctic will open, they have to be alert to that possibility and anticipate and plan for its occurrence.

Navy officer's would get relieved (fired) for standing up in a Sunday service and testifying about how Jesus had saved them, but now they'll also get fired for not being outspoken to the troops able the evils of AGW...

“What the Navy has done that’s been really interesting, Ray Mabus said he’s starting to actually evaluate his – you know, the military lives by evaluation – they’re starting to evaluate their base commanders on how well they communicate the risk of climate change about the base,” Whitehouse said.

“So, if you’re the base commander of Norfolk, or of Naval Station Newport, or of – what is it, Cherry Creek Marine Air Station in North Carolina – you are suddenly have on your checklist of what you’re evaluated on how well you’ve communicated what the risk of climate change is,” he said.

“And, for those bases, for Navy bases particularly, it’s a really real risk,” Whitehouse said. “They’re on the sea. Sea level rise is going to swamp what they do. It’s really practical. So, when people hear it from as trusted a source as a uniformed military officer it will make a big difference, and they have not been very forward about it from the uniform side of the military. DOD has been good. Mabus has been the best.”

religious tests, not mission planning. So when the next GOP President arrives, and the Navy stops paying $23/gal for bio-diesel, and the Sailors notice that their officers just spout whatever PC rubbish their political masters want, don't you think that dramatically impacts morale?

I know that when my military superiors lied to me, it was a dagger in my chest...

So is he telling me I need to go online today to register my six year old daughterand ten year old son for Selective Service? How about my 78 year old father, and 75 year old mother? What about the infirm or handicapped? What about folks with mental illnesses beside gender dysphoria? There are plenty of people in the population that are barred from serving, for various reasons. If those reasons are defensible bars, why are other bars to service not defensible?

What matters more, the ability to heft an 180-pound load on your shoulders, or the thoughts in your head?

Thoughts in your head. I can train you to heft a 180-pound load.

Also, the effectiveness of the US military is not simply physical. Instead, it is based on the ability to work as a cohesive unit, to put aside personal safety for the good of the group, to endure hardships for long periods of time. Transsexuals are mentally ill, and their demands for acceptance and their general unhappiness will poison any group that they become a part of.

I think we should start by only allowing females that identify as males to serve. They would have to meet the physical requirements of biological males. They may already be serving. Males that identify as females should start in non-combat roles in the medical field. Oh wait, I just described Cpl. Klinger!

Imagine my dismay when an 'important announcement by the Secretary of Defense", a few days post-Istanbul, was about TRANSGENDERS!!! WTF??? Secretary Carter was visibly embarrassed and seemed relieved when most of the questions were related to military strategy. I would have resigned.

The military won't take you if you are 8 foot 6 inches tall. You would impose special costs since you would need special uniform, bunk, etc. The trans impose special costs as well. This move is all about putting virtue signaling above war winning.

Will each branch be able to meet their soon-to-come quota, when there are actually so very few transgendered individuals available who will volunteer for duty? Will this lead to the draft, with transgendered individuals nationwide facing immediate call-up for duty?

I love unintended consequences, especially when Monty Python has already made fun of those that can be expected from this social engineering.

Unknown [and Unknowing]: You apparently don't get it. It is not the inclusion of transgenders in the military that most of us object to, but the timing of such an announcement and the importance afforded it when we are faced with obvious military challenges.

So, transgender/homosexual, transgender/crossover, transgender/ambiguous, and perhaps other classes in the transgender spectrum disorder. I wonder if they will favor masculine orientations (e.g. transgender/crossover female, the masculine partner in a transgender/homosexual couplet, and spin the [Russian] roulette for others). Or will they follow their civilian counterparts lead and be pro-choice.

RE:PC in military. recently met a 20 year navy guy at neighbors home. I complimented him that the Navy seems to have the best cursing and insult artists. He said they are not allowed to berate the new guys anymore, 'cause it might hurt their feeelings.

I have 21 years in the United States Army Reserve, I have been deployed twice, I have served as a squad leader, platoon sergeant, First Sergeant and Command Sergeant Major. I spent two years as the CSM for a multi-component unit. That is a unit that had a full time active duty mission that included both reserve and active duty soldiers.

This policy will create yet another protected class in the military and be yet one more blow to unit cohesiveness and over all military effectiveness. We have added yet another protected class in the military that will not be touched by command the second one of these individuals runs to the IG and screams discrimination.

I could write a book on the nonsense that occurs on a daily basis in the military that is caused by congress using the military as a grand social experiment.

In my 21 years in the military I spent a myriad of hours celebrating women, Hispanics, blacks, Asian Pacific Islanders, etc... Never once did I spend a moment celebrating my presence in the military. I just had to sit in EEO briefing after briefing explaining how I had to take special care to celebrate and never offend everyone else. Believe me, that sends a message to people like me.

Transhumanists may refer to abortionists and cannibals. They are people and corporations who express an orientation that cuts down human lives for casual and lucrative causes, respectively. Their victims are disarmed and are not even given a fighting chance or voice to secure life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

My personal opinion is that transgenderism is a form of mental disorder in a lot of folks, much like anorexia (thinking one is too fat, absent any evidence) or body integrity identity disorder.

That said, given the broad spectrum of humanity and population numbers, I can imagine that there are a few folks who are genuinely cross wired where transitioning could help them.

The practical effect that I foresee, unless they change the lower Physical performance requirements allowed for women to serve, is that MTF will rise higher in the ranks than real females, due to higher PT scores giving them an edge.

There were quite a few females serving as males in the Civil War. I have some examples in my two books. In one interesting example, a husband and wife served as officers in a Confederate unit. The wife was captured and delivered a baby while in a Union POW camp in Ohio. I don't know, in her instance, if she was serving as a male.

All fetus are sexless up to about 8 weeks. The basic template for the human body is female. You can see this in that both sexes have nipples and mammary glands.

There is a distinct difference in the brain of males and females. This occurs after 8 weeks when the different chromosomes produce different quantities of different hormones.

Now suppose something goes wrong. Not enough testosterone is produced. Maybe just enough for testes and penis, but not enough for the brain. Poof, you have the recipe for a woman with a penis. Either a homosexual or a she-male.

The template uses very little hormones to assign sex (the penis and testes are almost a throw-away), but requires large quantities of testosterone to modify itself to create a male brain. Without this hormone, the brain is left in the female template.

The question now, should these people with female brains be given a club and a spear?

With modern mechanized warfare, the answer is that assigned sex no longer matters at the tip of the spear. It may matter in the way battles are planned. A woman will design a battle differently than a man. In the end, this may just be a secret sauce.

I have 21 years in the Reserve Component, just like Uncle Biffy. I have served as a platoon leader, executive officer, detachment commander, S-4 and multiple stints as a company commander, in infantry, armor and military intelligence units.

I am in full agreement with Uncle Biffy. This is utter poison.

You know, a year or two ago, the military was so broke it was slashing EDD benefits that allowed service members to attend college while serving on active duty.

Apparently they're so flush all of a sudden that they can take on this huge medical liability. And the troops be damned. The mission be damned.

We are no longer led by serious people.

I'd take one soldier who's 2 percent over the allowable body fat percentage over ten of these little transgender nutcases. These people are already mentally ill even before they walk in the door. Their health care utilization and discipline issues are going to be off the charts.

This is stupid on stilts. It's like a page out of "Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds." These libtards are all lining up to buy tulip bulbs.

It's insane.

But speak the truth and you'll get passed over for sure, and eventually booted. The warfighters are checking out in droves, mid-career. Why stay in when you hit that 6, 8 or 12 year mark?

I remember going to drill, we'd draw weapons, go to the field, or to the range, and fucking TRAIN. It was awesome. There was no bullshit. We trained and maintained. We talked warfighting and logistics, and taking better care of Soldiers. It was grand.

Look at RC training schedules now. They're larded up with garbage SHARP briefings, EEOC briefings, stand-downs for this and that. And it's not even commanders and NCOs doing the training: More and more of it is outsourced to computer-based training firms run by SJWs with political connections to get sweet contracts, with Sen. McCaskill vetoing anyone who doesn't toe the line.

Commanders and 1SGs are pushed to the limit just maintaining compliance with these briefings.

It's going to take a generation before we undo the damage the libtards have done. If ever.

In Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers, everyone was accepted for military service if they were mentally capable of understanding the oath. Only veterans were permitted to vote:

The people of the Terran Federation are either "Citizens" or "Civilians". Everyone is born a "Civilian", and at age 18 every "Civilian" has the right to enroll for a minimal 2-year term of "Federal Service". In theory a completed term of Federal Service ensures a "Citizen" is willing to put the needs of the community before their own personal well-being. This is because Federal Service is tough and dangerous (by design). It can involve joining the military, being a human guinea pig, testing survival equipment, or manual labour. The Federation makes it quite easy to quit a term of service before completion (even during war-time), but once someone has quit they are never allowed to enroll again. This is to ensure that all volunteers are dedicated, whilst also discouraging people from leaving.

The Federation makes the opportunity of Federal Service open to everyone, able-bodied or not. A doctor giving a medical examination says "if you came in here in a wheelchair and blind in both eyes and were silly enough to insist on enrolling, they would find you something silly to match. Counting the fuzz on a caterpillar by touch, maybe." The only impediment that can render one ineligible for federal service is if a psychiatrist determines that one cannot understand the oath of service.

No. Active duty troops don't normally use the VA. They use the military health care system/Tricare. Which allows them access to some private providers, depending on the version of Tricare they select.

As soon as large numbers of trans people start enlisting, nearly every doctor currently doing gender reassignment therapy/surgery will quickly become authorized Tricare providers - just as surely as a U.S. Cavalry store and a payday loan place and a used car tote-the-note dealership opens up outside of every main gate.

It's amazing how many fecking idiots who never served are so confident about what they know when they don't know shit.

In my 21 years in the military I spent a myriad of hours celebrating women, Hispanics, blacks, Asian Pacific Islanders, etc... Never once did I spend a moment celebrating my presence in the military. I just had to sit in EEO briefing after briefing explaining how I had to take special care to celebrate and never offend everyone else. Believe me, that sends a message to people like me.

Is it about time for white men to stand up to this nonsense?

Why do people just ASSUME that white men are specifically incredibly racist and sexist?

It's time to take these required "courses" to court. Because it is unbelievably sexist and racist to assume ALL whites need these.

Coupe said...With modern mechanized warfare, the answer is that assigned sex no longer matters at the tip of the spear. It may matter in the way battles are planned. A woman will design a battle differently than a man. In the end, this may just be a secret sauce.

Sorry, Mech Warfare still involves hiking with heavy loads and the equipment it uses puts a major premium on upper body strength. Try serving a 155mm howitzer, or maneuvering inside a bouncing tank while carrying a 45lb shell in your arms. FWIW, tanks are evil machines. Turrets are designed to eat soft squishy bodies if you lose your balance while crossing rugged terrain at 30mph.

If the selection is done on merit, then they will still favor transgender/homosexual males, transgender/crossover females (i.e. biologically male, psychologically female), and transgender/ambiguous individuals who are are biologically male.

That said, the part about discriminating only based on qualification is an old joke told by female chauvinists, [class] diversity advocates (e.g. racists), "=" or selective exclusionists, and others in the Pro-choice Church.

So, currently women don't have to serve in combat roles. What does this do then for men, who may not want to serve in combat roles saying they are women. Can they serve as transgendered and get out of combat roles?

The Drill Sgt, Unclebiffy and jason ALL score a shack! (bullseye for the non-pilot crowd) Morale is ALREADY dropping like a stone and we have a HUGE shortage of fighter pilots already as well as pilots in general and it's getting worse, worse, worse with this shite. Civilians have NO IDEA about the physical demands placed upon the human body even in "hi-tech" situations. Ever pulled 9gs in a hi-speed turn while trying to keep the bad guy in sight?We are also having to spend $ we DON"T HAVE to re-design ejection-seats because female spines can't take the g-force of standard seats as well as developing time-consuming special weight training programs to strengthen the neck muscles of female fighter pilots because few have the musculature structure to withstand prolonged hi-g combat maneuvers. I could go on, but you get the picture. NONE of these expensive programs would be needed absent women in the Air Force. And DON'T even get me started about Trannies, open homosexuality and their effects on unit morale and cohesion

"What is worse than this story is another today that the Secretary of the Navy is using adherence to climate change doctrine (a forbidden religious test) as a factor in promoting senior Navy Officers."

That's good on the off chance that Climate Change concretizes into a physical being that we can fire missiles at.

The Coast Guard replaced the original Mackinaw with a lighter version, because of the fact of global warming, and help had to be called in two years back. This past El Nino winter was warm, but now it is over and we have a blank Sun. Cue ball. So it will be interesting to see what is coming in the Great Lakes. Since I don't have religious faith, I am not certain what to expect.

It's not just the 9g turns, it's hauling extra water and 60mm mortar rounds in your rucksack on a 5 day mission in the mountains. The Khojak pass is over 8,000 feet high. That's a Denver and a half. And there are lots of places higher than that. The fecking Hindu Kush mountains run through Afghanistan, and women's bodies have a fraction of the VO2 capacity of a man's, and we're trying to pretend they are fit infantry.

How do they think tank ammo gets crossloaded after an engagement? hint: it isn't by fucking crane.

How are wounded moved to the casualty collection point? Their gear? How are wounded pulled from the hatches of burning armored vehicles?

Here's a fucking hint... NOMEX tank crew uniforms have a handle sewn into the nape of the neck. You have to pull them out with brute strength.

Ever broke track on a Bradley or M1? Or M88 for that matter?

Women have stress fractures at 8 times the rate of men in basic training as it is, and that's without trying to pretend they're infantry.

As for the "100%" crack, that is inane BS. I knew a quite fit woman discharged for a minor thyroid condition. There are myriads of conditions that will not only exclude one from admission, but get one ejected out.

Anyone on sex hormone treatment really should not be in the active military. There are issues involved.

Not even going to touch the psych stuff, because that can be evaluated person by person. But really - think of the qualified, trained military personnel discharged by medical boards every year, and think of how they feel reading/hearing that comment. It's just rubbing salt in the wound.

I invite any of you who think this is even remotely logical to read through the official standards. Bad lipids requiring more than one medication, or inadequately controlled? NO - but hormone therapy yes? If you have headaches bad enough to require prescription medication more than twice a year, no.

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/613003p.pdf

We're not even pretending to be rational any more. Not even pretending. Now read through this (about what transsexuals really experience and require):http://www.transgendercare.com/medical/hormonal/hormone-tx_assch_gooren.htmThere are substantial risks involved to the individual, and definite side effects.

For grins back in the 80's there used to be a alternate "Tankers" PT test.

The 5 events were

1. rolling a tank road wheel (100lb) around the bases of a ball field (timed)2. picking up and pressing above your head, a 105mm tank round (40lb) (63 times) (the loadout of a tank) (timed)3. carrying a track block (70lb) 10 yards, putting it in a neat pile, then running back 10 yards to get another (10 times)(timed)4. low crawling towing a 100lb tow cable for 20 yards (timed)5. a timed run

The question about Trump's reaction to the Ash Carter transgender announcement was intended to make everybody uncomfortable; Trump, Trump's Manhattanite kids, Trump's New York society friends, Trump's blue collar supporters in the Midwest and Southeast, and even Ann Althouse.

Althouse; who I presume is presently undecided about the presidential race, and might even be tempted to vote for Donald Trump if she were to understand that Trump stood for a brand of limited government in which the federal government was smaller, and run better, without the influences of many of the traditional left-wing special interests, but also -- through Trump's New York values -- was mostly pro-choice, and pro gay rights and generally favorable to the LGBT community.

Trump and a transgender military is what I see as a "wedge" issue in Trumpism.

For the last few years the Air Force has been saying that the airlines are hiring all their best pilots. But the exit rate is beyond what the airlines could hire.

The reason people are leaving is the hours are long, there is no end of the war in sight, and they are just plinking the enemy. The planes are broke, the maintenance troops have no spare parts, and squadron life is non-existent.

So, they have decided to reduce training requirements to produce more pilots. An idea is to fly Saturday and Sunday, and stagger the maintenance troops so they don't have to work 12 hours a day seven-days a week.

Alas, more experienced pilots are leaving than they can replace with pilots with basic skills. They are leaving because they hate the new normal.

I just read a fascinating book about the fall of Austria-Hungary, "A Mad Catastrophe." It starts by describing the successful 45-year campaign by the Hungarians to neuter the Empire's military, and then describes the consequences when they actually had to fight in 1914. Not just the weak, hollow forces, but the kind of political animals that rose to command in that environment, as good people stayed away.

The motivations are completely different, but the idea of a politically adept and powerful part of society undermining the military for its own purposes, and then the consequences when you suddenly need to fight, are highly relevant to what has been going on in this country, I fear.

The reason people are leaving is the hours are long, there is no end of the war in sight, and they are just plinking the enemy. The planes are broke, the maintenance troops have no spare parts, and squadron life is non-existent.

Have crews work all night to get the birds ready to strap on. Fly a multi-hour mission because we refuse to take the risks to forward deploy birds to Turkey or Kurdistan. Can't have head count in theater. Overfly the AO, but don't drop any ordnance on 3/4 of the missions, because there is a chance that the guy down there in jeans next to the ISIS fuel tanker is a civilian rather than an ISIS fighter. Fly home, debrief, rinse and repeat the next day.

Chuck said...The question about Trump's reaction to the Ash Carter transgender announcement was intended to make everybody uncomfortable; Trump, Trump's Manhattanite kids, Trump's New York society friends, Trump's blue collar supporters in the Midwest and Southeast, and even Ann Althouse.

Remind me what Trump's reaction was. I vaguely recall him saying that Caitlyn Jenner could pee wherever she wanted to in Trump Tower and that he'd do nothing about bathrooms because it would hurt businesses. Did I miss something?

chickelit said...In Chuck's world, Obama does something stupid and demoralizing to the military and it becomes Trump's fault.

Of course not. I never, ever, not once said it was "Trump's fault." My only question was whether Trump has ever agreed with you; that the Obama decision was "stupid and demoralizing to the military"?

Will the Trump kids, at cocktail parties on Fifth Avenue and in the Hamptons, say that "it was stupid and demoralizing to the military"?

Will Professor Althouse support Trump if Trump makes it his personal goal to overturn Obergefell, like Hillary Clinton (and maybe Trump too!?!) has made it her personal mission to overturn Citizens United? Honestly, I don't know how anybody can plot to "overturn" either decision. Amend the Constitution? Obtain assurances of "overturn" positions from SCOTUS nominees?

jr565 said...So, currently women don't have to serve in combat roles. What does this do then for men, who may not want to serve in combat roles saying they are women. Can they serve as transgendered and get out of combat roles?

Will Professor Althouse support Trump if Trump makes it his personal goal to overturn Obergefell, like Hillary Clinton (and maybe Trump too!?!) has made it her personal mission to overturn Citizens United?

Trump would be foolish to make overturning Oberbefell a personal goal. Whether Althouse supports Trump or not is her own business, but she'd be foolish to vote for any candidate who vowed to pack the courts to garner partisan decisions (like Rodham has sworn to do). We've lived through foolish Althouse POTUS picks before and will continue to do so.

Transgenders are ok because Progressives outlawed war. Now war is fought with PowerPoint slides and joysticks. We wouldn't dream of prosecuting a war with the goal of unconditional surrender of the enemy. That's not inclusive enough, and that isn't our shared values.

If morale is low now, just imagine how it will be with a woman as C-in-C.

Barry Jacobs said...I note with interest that diabetics are still not allowed to join the military in any capacity.

7/1/16, 10:53 PM

Interest? INTEREST?

Whadadr'ya NUTS?

Yeah, right, crawl right up to 'em and give them a big friggin shot. during a battle. Symptoms of diabetes includeincreased urine output,excessive thirst,weight loss,hunger,fatigue,skin problemsslow healing wounds,yeast infections,blurred vision, andtingling or numbness in the feet or toes.Yeah, since normal people don't have those problems, let's let the medics coddle this disability too!Maybe we can let Trigglypuff in too!She looks like she could kill Daesh by falling on them.

Trump's Manhattanite kids, Trump's New York society friends, Trump's blue collar supporters in the Midwest and Southeast, and even Ann Althouse.

Sounds like a gain to me and my party. While I am not a :life long Republican" I was a Democrat for a while, like everybody I knew, that bastard Reagan won me over. Chuck would no doubt be whining about Reagan too.